This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

My top 5 frustrations with the current video game industry...

#1POOKISTANPosted 8/19/2011 2:56:44 AM
1) The stigma that follows those whom play video games regularly in the US - In my opinion people in the US are generally very closed-minded and unwilling to take into consideration possibilities beyond what they believe to be true. One of the most common beliefs in this regard are that video games are not a legitimate form of entertainment. The irony is that a majority of people that make this claim have had limited or no experience with video games - Beyond that many of these people enjoy TV, movies, and the internet regularly, all of which are closer to video games than they would want to admit.

Because of this belief many people who merely claim they play video games are designated "losers" or, at the very least, are viewed as significantly less desirable based on that reason alone. Though there are a lot of examples of people whom play video games regularly that fit this stereotype you have to wonder if they fit this stereotype because they actually are "losers" or do they fit this stereotype because everyone around them makes this assumption and doesn't give them the same chance to prove themselves "worthwhile" as "normal people."

This is something I've struggled with my whole life however I'm dedicated to pursuing what I'd like to even if it means alienation - In other words I don't alienate myself by playing games but society and this belief do a good job of alienating me because I play games. It's extremely frustrating and unfair but I'm not about to change due to a misconception a majority of the populace has about "my kind."

If the world doesn't want to accept me for what I am than so-be-it - I think a lot of people who play games think this and some give up on trying to pursue a social life because of it. It's sad and it's unfair to be treated this way and there's really no reason for it other than ignorance and, in most cases, hypocrisy (if you enjoy TV, movies, and/or the internet on a regular basis you have no right judging those who play video games, a significantly similar form of entertainment, as a "lesser being" than you).

2) The online pass system - I view this not so much as simply as a way to make money but more-so a way to not have to compete with used game prices and making money even on sub-par products. The online pass also effectively eliminates renting games, one of the few quality controls in the video game industry that consumers are able to use. Other than that it obviously prevents people from playing online who are unable or unwilling to pay the requisite fee to play online - This lowers the userbase which can negatively effect the experience for those who paid for the ability to play a game online.

This is how it has worked in the past: You put the effort into making a good game and you will make sales because of it. If it's a crappy game that was rushed and/or ill-conceived you will have to lower the price to make sales - If you don't the people who sell used copies will do so making the sales on your new copies of the said game plummet. It forces developers to be accountable for the quality of their product and that's how it should be - The online pass system is a way to take that accountability away.

<{[PAGE 1 OF 3]}>
#2POOKISTAN(Topic Creator)Posted 8/19/2011 2:56:59 AM
Because $60 is a good chunk of money it's obviously a good idea to get a preview of what you're paying for - This is where renting a game comes in. For a small fee you're able to take a game out for a test run and see how it plays - If it's worthwhile you're likely to go shell out the money to have it available in the future but if not you're satisfied because you only paid a few dollars to try it and find out it's not good as opposed to $60 which is a lot of money to blindly put down on something you're not sure is good or not. That's pretty much the definition of consumer-side quality control and the online pass system effectively takes that away since you cannot sample the entire game if part of it is withheld by the creators.

Then, as I mentioned, is the part most people don't take into consideration when judging whether or not the online pass system is justified: The userbase. If you have to pay for the ability to play online there's going to be less people online playing than if you didn't have to do so - It's as simple as that. It really seems unfair that this could negatively effect the experience of people that are willing to fork over the money to play online but it does. I've seen my fair share of "abandoned" online games where very few (or nobody) plays online anymore and the online pass system is a good way to ensure that will happen even faster.

3) Those whom defend the online pass system - It's bad enough it's becoming a universal trend so we don't need sheep reciting marketing propaganda that's supposed to make us feel like it's a necessity rather than a decision made by the developers. The video game market has had online games well before some "marketing genius" (AKA f****** a******) came up with this method of leeching money from those that support them - There's plenty of examples of games that have really pushed the envelope of online gaming and had significant financial success without this system because they took the time to create something worthwhile. It's also worth asking yourself why you're even paying Microsoft's fee to play games online if you still have to bribe the developers of the games to allow you to connect to their multiplayer. Please reread the second listing on this for specifics - You really should if you're convinced any manner of obtaining money from those who support you, regardless of the implications, is okay.

4) Games that don't get localized to the US - There's a ton of games that are fairly awesome that you and I have never played and, most likely, will never play simply because developers are unwilling to change the text into English. In some cases there's games that're already in English that just never get released in all regions where English is the primary language - This generation Wii is being branded as most guilty of this since there's alotta' games in Europe that never came over here that didn't even need localization to do so!

Either way text is not a very significant chunk of many games' development cycle so localization is fairly simple task when compared to the task of making the game from scratch. The fact that this little bit of effort can open up a whole new region to make profit on a product that's already been developed seems like a no-brainer to me but apparently there's a disturbing amount of people in the industry that disagree. It's very unfortunate that a lot of the greatest experiences in gaming are not being distributed everywhere after so much care was put into creating them and so little work would have to be done to localize them in comparison to the work originally put forth to create the game.

<{[PAGE 2 OF 3]}>
#3POOKISTAN(Topic Creator)Posted 8/19/2011 2:57:52 AM
5) Developers that don't meet release dates and/or are unwilling to delay games to make them "how they should be" - Yeah, it seems kinda' contradictory but I'll explain: First off, rushed products can ruin even the best of concepts and I've seen it happen many, many times - The sad part is when developers do this they increase the chance that the product will fail to sell up to their expectations thus the likelihood of a sequel where they will be able to correct the mistakes made will be significantly decreased. In other words if you're going to do something new you better be willing to do it right - Sometimes this means delaying the release and most would rather have a late product that's worthwhile than an on-time product that's sub-par.

The other side of the spectrum involves content that's really not all that time-consuming to create and/or has been available for quite some time that gets delayed - Usually this pertains to downloadable content. Here's a couple of examples for clarification: First off, Portal 2 was supposed to have DLC released for it already but they never bothered doing so. The thing that bothers me regarding this is they have a functional level editor available for the PC which means making levels should not be that difficult of a task - I have no doubt I could create a set of worthwhile levels with this software for distribution via a downloadable package in just a few days. If this is true then why the hell is it taking a full development team so long to do so?

The other example is Little Big Planet 2 - It was supposed to have a downloadable content package quite some time ago that would allow Move support in the game. Now although that is certainly more complex than creating levels with a level editor there was a game that was included with Little Big Planet 2 called Little Big Planet Prehistoric Moves that included Move support in the same game engine - In other words they've had a way of making it work since before the game was released yet they haven't bothered putting the finishing touches on it to allow players to use these tools in their levels.

This is all very frustrating since both games still have no "true" release dates and even if they did how could we trust them since they let the last one slide without explanation? It's very deceptive making claims that you're not going to live up to that lead to sales. I bought Portal 2 at full price largely on the promise of downloadable content since it has very little replay value but downloadable content changes that - As I expected, it's sat collecting dust for quite some time now since no downloadable content has been released. The same has happened with Little Big Planet 2 as I've been waiting for the Move tools in future creations but they just never bothered. Both of these downloadable packages are supposedly still on the way but who knows when they will arrive...

<{[PAGE 3 OF 3]}>
#4FoppePosted 8/19/2011 3:33:20 AM
4: Now you know how European gamers have had it since...well, the beginning.
For example, the DS version of Chrono Trigger was the first Chrono game to be released in Europe.
Final Fantasy? 7 was the first numbered title we got.
---
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC
#5Damaged7Posted 8/19/2011 4:20:28 PM
You don't seem to have much knowledge of how the gaming industry works.
---
The girlfriend complains that we dont spend time together. *Takes 360 into kitchen* - Sig by FFTHEWINNER
#6zinsindettaPosted 8/19/2011 4:23:00 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#7FFTHEWINNERPosted 8/19/2011 4:28:34 PM
*agrees with tc*
---
WHO AM I?FFTHEWINNER
WHO ARE YOU?URTHELOSER
#8FFTHEWINNERPosted 8/19/2011 4:29:36 PM
*agrees with tc*
---
WHO AM I?FFTHEWINNER
WHO ARE YOU?URTHELOSER
#9FFTHEWINNERPosted 8/19/2011 4:29:54 PM
*agrees with tc*
---
WHO AM I?FFTHEWINNER
WHO ARE YOU?URTHELOSER
#10zinsindettaPosted 8/19/2011 4:42:41 PM
Oh sorry TC I should tell you about your opinions instead of saying mine. I agree with your 2, 3 and 4. 1 and 5 are not that big a deal in my opinion.
---
Gamertag/PSN - http://gamercards.exophase.com/31441.png
http://www.bungie.net/Stats/Reach/CareerStats/default.aspx?player=SinZinDetta